Glenn Beck: Raising the debt ceiling is the beginning of the end for Republicans

posted at 9:48 pm on January 4, 2011 by Allahpundit

A surreal clip, not because they don’t understand the consequences of failing to raise the ceiling but because they do — and Napolitano, at least, seems prepared to accept them. From the myopic standpoint of what’s more likely to bring about the end of the GOP, I’m guessing that an economic collapse triggered by a Republican-driven federal default is slightly more likely to cause trouble for conservatives than voting to raise the ceiling in return for, say, a balanced-budget amendment or other heavy debt-reducing concessions. But beyond that, and I ask this in all sincerity, how exactly is it “fiscally conservative” to willingly default on your obligations? The ceiling is just a ceiling. A Congress committed to solvency could raise the limit now to preserve the stability of global markets and then get cracking on real budget cuts — and entitlement reform — to start moving us away from that ceiling, never to return. This idea of letting the government default because it’s the only way to make Americans get serious about the debt reminds me of some liberals shrugging off spiraling gas prices a few years ago on grounds that they would finally make Americans get serious about alternative energy. In both cases, because the final “crisis” is supposedly inevitable, the point is to bring it about ASAP and make people suffer until they’re willing to agree to dramatic change. Ironically, it reminds of the Cloward-Piven strategy: If you want meaningful reform to an unjust system, the best thing to do is overwhelm it until it crashes and then rebuild it in the ashes more to your liking. Beck’s not quite willing to go that far here, but Napolitano? You tell me.

As companion viewing to this, head over here and watch Jim DeMint encourage freshman Republicans not to vote for raising the debt ceiling because “it’s not a problem they created.” Where does that principle begin and end? A lot of Democrats elected to Congress in 2006 and 2008 didn’t vote for war in Iraq either, but the party continued to fund the mission anyway because a gradual drawdown was more responsible than simply pulling the plug. Why does that logic not apply in this case? Click the image to watch.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5

Unfortunately, we have to raise the debt ceiling.

It is a practical impossibility to maintain the government without doing it…including, FYI, the soldiers overseas.

Republicans should fight for as many cuts as they possibly can, can even delay it for a while if it gives them an advantage…but ultimately, people like Beck really are clueless about the repercussions; they may understand the practicalities, but don’t really comprehend them.

neoavatara on January 4, 2011 at 9:52 PM

Because nothing will get done. Nothing. Ever. The ceiling will go up, both sides will pull a modified Peter Principle and get their new spending to match the limit, and nothing will change.

More people on the dole for the spending, more voters to say “No!”, and more limp-wristed pols who will kick the can down the road. This is uncharted territory and the people up there have no clue what to do or how to stop.

Bishop on January 4, 2011 at 9:52 PM

I’m guessing that an economic collapse triggered by a Republican-driven federal default is slightly more likely to cause trouble for conservatives than voting to raise the ceiling in return for, say, a balanced-budget amendment or other heavy debt-reducing concessions.

Um… if they reduce the spending *now*… they won’t have to raise the debt ceiling?

And raising the debt ceiling is an explicit admission that spending will *not* be reduced.

You don’t need to up the limit on your VISA if you plan to stop spending, dude.

Midas on January 4, 2011 at 9:53 PM

A Congress committed to solvency could raise the limit now to preserve the stability of global markets and then get cracking on real budget cuts — and entitlement reform — to start moving us away from that ceiling, never to return.

Unless, this is the return for raising the debt ceiling, then we are not solving anything.

Kini on January 4, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Unfortunately, we have to raise the debt ceiling.

It is a practical impossibility to maintain the government without doing it…including, FYI, the soldiers overseas.

Republicans should fight for as many cuts as they possibly can, can even delay it for a while if it gives them an advantage…but ultimately, people like Beck really are clueless about the repercussions; they may understand the practicalities, but don’t really comprehend them.

neoavatara on January 4, 2011 at 9:52 PM

BS.

Most every poster here could provide enough spending cut suggestions that could take place this Friday that would keep the military fully funded and still reduce spending enough to not have to raise the ceiling.

The problem is that our ‘representatives’ simply *won’t* do what it takes, and the fallout is going to be worse the longer they fail to do so.

Midas on January 4, 2011 at 9:55 PM

We know what happens when we raise the ceiling. More drunken spending. We only have theories on what will happen if we don’t raise it, or claims that spending can’t be cut.

SouthernGent on January 4, 2011 at 9:55 PM

We have to raise it because no one is willing to step up and seriously cut spending.

Emily M. on January 4, 2011 at 9:55 PM

pain cometh.

ted c on January 4, 2011 at 9:56 PM

We have to raise it because no one is willing to step up and seriously cut spending.

Emily M. on January 4, 2011 at 9:55 PM

And absent that lack of willingness, at least not raising the limit would *force* the cuts, I suppose.

Midas on January 4, 2011 at 9:56 PM

I just told my husband this evening, ” honey, I believe it is time to raise our debt ceiling”.. and he thought I meant congress.

shar61 on January 4, 2011 at 9:57 PM

Marxist

hokie.rob on January 4, 2011 at 9:58 PM

Glenn Beck: Raising the debt ceiling is the beginning of the end for Republicans

Nonsense. It’s the end of the end.

Bugler on January 4, 2011 at 9:58 PM

Yes, raising the debt ceiling looks like a pretty clear omen that the spending isn’t going to be reined in.

How many more trillions have to be diverted to the moochers and con artists in government before we can stop this runaway train?

Aitch748 on January 4, 2011 at 9:58 PM

But beyond that, and I ask this in all sincerity, how exactly is it “fiscally conservative” to willingly default on your obligations?

It’s not “our” obligations, it’s the obligations of those who have been governing without our consent or constitutional authority. “We” did not right the laws that incurred an unserviceable debt; they did. And “we” will not continue pay for more of it unless they agree to stop adding to it. “THAT” is fiscally conservative.

elfman on January 4, 2011 at 9:59 PM

The ceiling is just a ceiling. A Congress committed to solvency could raise the limit now to preserve the stability of global markets and then get cracking on real budget cuts — and entitlement reform — to start moving us away from that ceiling, never to return.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Thanks AP!

Aquateen Hungerforce on January 4, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Hate to admit it, but Allah is spot on here. Dammit.

Sugar Land on January 4, 2011 at 9:59 PM

And absent that lack of willingness, at least not raising the limit would *force* the cuts, I suppose.

Midas on January 4, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Yeah, but I don’t think anyone besides Bachmann (maybe) really has the guts to fight on this issue.

Emily M. on January 4, 2011 at 10:00 PM

And the post just under this one is:

Report: House GOP backing away from promise to cut $100 billion in spending this year?

Irony?

Tuari on January 4, 2011 at 10:00 PM

They can’t even cut 100 billion without having a serious case of the shiites, and we’re supposed to trust them to put the house back in order once the debt ceiling is raised?

Bishop on January 4, 2011 at 10:00 PM

You don’t need to up the limit on your VISA if you plan to stop spending, dude.

No, darling, you do, if they’re expenses incurred previously (say, when you unwisely let your GF go mad with your credit card) and only if you can pay this month’s–and succeeding months’–bills out of your income.

Fortunata on January 4, 2011 at 10:00 PM

For once I agree with AP. This has to be done, but the Republicans better make sure this is the last time this is done. The next thing is to start cutting the budget.

/nobody better be talking about raising taxes, just this once don’t you know in order to get things in order. We’ve played that game, the taxes go up, but the spending never goes down. It’s time to cut off the wino in the capital.

AZfederalist on January 4, 2011 at 10:01 PM

I appreciate Beck for changing his HORRIBLE intro music [radio show], but I still fear his pending madness.

Does Beck really want to plunge this feeble economy into the abyss?

Raise the ceiling, and then go for a Ryan-type solution to curb spending, which will require much good and honest salesmanship on our part.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:01 PM

Clearly, defaulting on our debt obligations is not a fiscal or PR prudent move. However, using the debt ceiling vote as leverage to demand significant spending cuts is shrewd and thrifty. Don’t dive straight into bankruptcy Repubs. Balance is key here. Fight for bid spending reductions as part of the deal.

anXdem on January 4, 2011 at 10:01 PM

Imagine a private company who has a 50 year history of borrowing money without paying a nickel back, then going back to the same bank and asking to borrow more.

Politicians live in a world I am unfamiliar with.

fogw on January 4, 2011 at 10:01 PM

But beyond that, and I ask this in all sincerity, how exactly is it “fiscally conservative” to willingly default on your obligations?

Mr. Pundit, obviously you have never been in the situation where you tell your creditors that you just don’t have the money. At that point, you begin to negotiate, $25 now, perhaps another 25$ next week. Once you hit the wall, and admit to yourself, and to your creditors that you have a problem, THAT’S WHEN YOU GET A CHANCE TO FIX IT. It’s called a ‘work out’ by the financial big shots.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:02 PM

bid should be big. Sheesh.

anXdem on January 4, 2011 at 10:02 PM

Unfortunately, we have to raise the debt ceiling.

It is a practical impossibility to maintain the government without doing it…including, FYI, the soldiers overseas.

Republicans should fight for as many cuts as they possibly can, can even delay it for a while if it gives them an advantage…but ultimately, people like Beck really are clueless about the repercussions; they may understand the practicalities, but don’t really comprehend them.

neoavatara on January 4, 2011 at 9:52 PM

SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT. PULL OUT OUR TROOPS. STOP SENDING SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS, FUNDING MEDICARE, ETC. I DONT CARE SEND THEM ALL HOME NO MORE GOVERNMENT DO NOT VOTE FOR THE DEBT CEILING HIKE AND WATCH MORE GLENN BECK

NoStoppingUs on January 4, 2011 at 10:02 PM

For much of the Public, this is an age for gladiators (and even martyrs) in politics–not more spineless lawyers. Lawyers don’t inspire their followers/constituents to sacrifice anything. That’s been the problem for the last fifty years. Nobody’s willing to do without. Especially not anyone connected with government.

RBMN on January 4, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Does Beck really want to plunge this feeble economy into the abyss?

Raise the ceiling, and then go for a Ryan-type solution to curb spending, which will require much good and honest salesmanship on our part.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:01 PM

Actually, yes. The price of gold will sky rocket. And we all know Beck’s stake in gold…

This man is after the money, plain and simple.

NoStoppingUs on January 4, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Barack Obama and his democrats are trying to DESTROY THIS COUNTRY. THE MUST BE STOPPED. If the GOP can’t stop them, this country goes to ruin, and Obama will step in front of the TV cameras and says, ‘Make me supreme leader and I will save you’. Do you want that to happen?

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:04 PM

Glenn Beck: Raising the debt ceiling is the beginning of the end for Republicans

Nonsense. It’s the end of the end.

Bugler on January 4, 2011 at 9:58 PM

Right.
The beginning was probably Med. Pt D and the middle of the end was TARP I. The GOP can do nothing but spend, and needs to be imploded and replaced.

james23 on January 4, 2011 at 10:04 PM

Mr. Pundit, obviously you have never been in the situation where you tell your creditors that you just don’t have the money. At that point, you begin to negotiate, $25 now, perhaps another 25$ next week. Once you hit the wall, and admit to yourself, and to your creditors that you have a problem, THAT’S WHEN YOU GET A CHANCE TO FIX IT. It’s called a ‘work out’ by the financial big shots.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:02 PM

That philosophy, along with “QE2″ = a total collapse of the dollar and a depression with much higher unemployment, interest rates and inflation. Then there’s the blood in the streets, which i think Beck expects, and dare I say hasten. Beck wants to “get it over with”. Easy for him to say with his luxury bunker.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:05 PM

We’re $250b away from the ceiling. It used to take some time to spend that kind of money.

I said it with TARP and I’ll say it again, despite what you cowards all think. A cleansing fire is a good and proper thing in any eco-system from time to time. This applies to any economic system as well.

Aquateen Hungerforce on January 4, 2011 at 10:05 PM

If Jim DeMint is encouraging freshman Republicans not to vote for raising the debt ceiling because “it’s not a problem they created.” Where does that principle begin and end?

A better question would be, is DeMint suggesting default?
The consequences of default are far worse than raising the debt ceiling. However, I don’t want the debt ceiling raised unless there are real reforms, otherwise, we’re just putting off the inevitable.

Kini on January 4, 2011 at 10:06 PM

The alternative is to go after the budget with a meat ax, or rather, a chain saw. A two-man chain saw.

RBMN on January 4, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Why is Fox still employing a 9/11 Truther?

SnarkVader on January 4, 2011 at 10:07 PM

A Congress committed to solvency could raise the limit now to preserve the stability of global markets and then get cracking on real budget cuts — and entitlement reform — to start moving us away from that ceiling, never to return.

It’s because we have zero, zip, zilch, nada faith that they will do the part that comes after “and then”.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me 647 times, shame on me.

miConsevative on January 4, 2011 at 10:08 PM

Can we dispense with the apocalyptic nonsense about default and shutdown, please? Neither will result from a refusal to raise the debt ceiling.

Bugler on January 4, 2011 at 10:08 PM

The alternative is to go after the budget with a meat ax, or rather, a chain saw. A two-man chain saw.

RBMN on January 4, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Perhaps in 2012, but impossible now.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:08 PM

Barack Obama and his democrats are trying to DESTROY THIS COUNTRY. THE MUST BE STOPPED. If the GOP can’t stop them, this country goes to ruin, and Obama will step in front of the TV cameras and says, ‘Make me supreme leader and I will save you’. Do you want that to happen?

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:04 PM

Agreed. I’m just not crazy about the idea of defaulting, and I’m not convinced doing so wouldn’t somehow benefit Barry. The Repubs could end up looking like disaster-masters while Barry sails into a second term.

anXdem on January 4, 2011 at 10:09 PM

We won’t see meaningful entitlement reform or budget cuts.

artist on January 4, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Perhaps in 2012, but impossible now.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:08 PM

You really think they’ll do it in 2012?

Emily M. on January 4, 2011 at 10:10 PM

As companion viewing to this, head over here and watch Jim DeMint encourage freshman Republicans not to vote for raising the debt ceiling because “it’s not a problem they created.

I agree with DeMint. When do they throw the breaks on? If not now when? If not us who?

Dr Evil on January 4, 2011 at 10:10 PM

Can we dispense with the apocalyptic nonsense about default and shutdown, please? Neither will result from a refusal to raise the debt ceiling.

Bugler on January 4, 2011 at 10:08 PM

If we don’t pay our debt obligations, things will get very ugly. At the very least our currency will no longer be the world’s default money. Bad. Vary bad.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:10 PM

Why is Fox still employing a 9/11 Truther?

SnarkVader on January 4, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Why is Hot Air still allowing you to post here?

katy on January 4, 2011 at 10:10 PM

But beyond that, and I ask this in all sincerity, how exactly is it “fiscally conservative” to willingly default on your obligations?

Ask Dave Ramsey.

Ronnie on January 4, 2011 at 10:10 PM

I feel like cutting and pasting my reply from the previous post here.

Tommy_G on January 4, 2011 at 10:11 PM

The nation goes into debt $54,000 every second of every day of every week, etc. While I was typing this the debt increased by what, 2 million bucks?

It’s all over but the crying.

Bishop on January 4, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Can we at least enjoy the moment of Pelosi having to give up the gavel before we speculate on how bad the Republicans will fail…?

Seven Percent Solution on January 4, 2011 at 10:11 PM

voting to raise the ceiling in return for, say, a balanced-budget amendment or other heavy debt-reducing concessions

No, they will trade raising the debt ceiling for nothing.

So just why is it the “squishy” liberals seem to stick to their socialist guns though thick and thin on their path to bankrupt the country but the GOP can’t have the same resolve and fortitude to defend limited government?

AshleyTKing on January 4, 2011 at 10:11 PM

And among the first bills that will be introduced in the House under Boehner’s speakership will be a measure that cuts congressional spending by 5 percent. Analysts called the move largely symbolic, noting that it would hardly make a dent in the country’s $1 trillion deficit. In his office’s first press release of the new year, Boehner claimed Tuesday the measure, if signed into law by President Obama, will immediately save taxpayers $35 million.

…..

L

O

L

artist on January 4, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Perhaps in 2012, but impossible now.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:08 PM

You really think they’ll do it in 2012?

Emily M. on January 4, 2011 at 10:10 PM

A Ryan-type plan, perhaps.

Face it, the majority of American people are addicted to government spending.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:12 PM

Don’t fund Obamacare for starters. The GOP is going to get shredded if they fail to stand behind the issues they promised during their campaigns. We the people spoke loudly in November, all but yelled from our roof tops. We gave the GOP huge and historic victories in order for them to show us and the world that they are different from the Liberals. It’s really that simple and need not be built into something confusing. Either we have two different party’s and two different ideologies, or we don’t with this current system. Is there a single politician that doesn’t lie when his/her lips are moving?

Keemo on January 4, 2011 at 10:12 PM

Sorry, answered my question by asking it. This is the party of McCain, Bush, and Murkowski.

AshleyTKing on January 4, 2011 at 10:12 PM

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:05 PM

Just the opposite. Raising the debt ceiling tells the world financial community that we intend to monetize the debt, and that WOULD collapse the dollar.

Telling bond holders that we’re not rolling over any more debt right now, until we get spending under control would show the world that we are serious about our financial circumstances.

Start drilling for oil, get rid of ridiculous regulations and government bureaucracy, and the bond holders would be happy to hold onto their investments and continue to collect interest on the debt. Debt that would be paid back over time with stronger dollars.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:12 PM

I’m beginning to wonder if Ed and Allah take these cracks at conservatives to set themselves up as “reasonable conservatives” a la Frum and BOR. Or if they are simply Mobys.

besser tot als rot on January 4, 2011 at 10:13 PM

Massive budget cuts would inspire a lot more confidence in the World than raising the debt ceiling again. The massive budget cuts are not going to happen, but that would actually strengthen the dollar, rather than just kicking the can down the road.

RBMN on January 4, 2011 at 10:13 PM

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:10 PM

We can keep the current debt ceiling without defaulting on debt obligations.

Bugler on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

So the only two alternatives are (1) raise the debt ceiling or (2) default? What, is reining in spending and shuttering money sinkholes in the government an absurd fantasy that doesn’t even bear mentioning?

Aitch748 on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

No discussion is complete without mentioning Obama’s 2006 explanation of his vote against raising the debt ceiling: “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. . . . Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

If Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling, surely it couldn’t be that bad, right?

JohnJ on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

The consequences of default are far worse than raising the debt ceiling. However, I don’t want the debt ceiling raised unless there are real reforms, otherwise, we’re just putting off the inevitable.

Kini on January 4, 2011 at 10:06 PM

My sister is an addict and one thing everyone who has had any extended exposure to addicts is they won’t change until they hit rock bottom – and there are many HUGE crises on the way down where you think THIS has GOT to wake them up – doesn’t happen.

These guys are addicted to spending our money. Freely being able to move the debt ceiling with NO consequence – and there really is NO consequence to them when they spend beyond their means – keeps them from hitting bottom. We thought my sister would wake up when she lost her husband – then her house – then her job – now she’s whittling away at her 401k. These guys are spending our 401k’s – and our kids.

miConsevative on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

Just the opposite. Raising the debt ceiling tells the world financial community that we intend to monetize the debt, and that WOULD collapse the dollar.

Telling bond holders that we’re not rolling over any more debt right now, until we get spending under control would show the world that we are serious about our financial circumstances.

Start drilling for oil, get rid of ridiculous regulations and government bureaucracy, and the bond holders would be happy to hold onto their investments and continue to collect interest on the debt. Debt that would be paid back over time with stronger dollars.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:12 PM

I see your point, but it also would mean not paying the Chinese among others. They will then drop us. Then we will have to monetize like never before.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

But beyond that, and I ask this in all sincerity, how exactly is it “fiscally conservative” to willingly default on your obligations? The ceiling is just a ceiling.

A Congress committed to solvency could raise the limit now to preserve the stability of global markets and then get cracking on real budget cuts — and entitlement reform

— to start moving us away from that ceiling, never to return

Now you are practicing your stand up routine in your blogs, that is funny! They will kick the can down the road, make noisy promises to appease us, and then spend more!I am not saying I know best on this issue but my gut feeling says, do not raise the limit just like it said no to TARP and Stimulus. Nothing will convince these people to cut spending in a serious manner that I have seen!

bluemarlin on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

artist on January 4, 2011 at 10:11 PM

$35 million? The IRS spends more than that every year on liquid paper correcting fluid, even though they type everything on a computer.

Bishop on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

I have no problem with raising the debt ceiling as long as they get some major concessions for it. Attach it to an ObamaCare repeal, or to a balanced-budget amendment. But I expect a significant win here.

Caiwyn on January 4, 2011 at 10:15 PM

Go Arkansas! Go SEC!

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:15 PM

The ceiling is just a ceiling. A Congress committed to solvency could raise the limit now to preserve the stability of global markets and then get cracking on real budget cuts — and entitlement reform — to start moving us away from that ceiling, never to return.

This is what I want happening, but does anyone see it happening?

MeatHeadinCA on January 4, 2011 at 10:16 PM

I’m beginning to wonder if Ed and Allah take these cracks at conservatives to set themselves up as “reasonable conservatives” a la Frum and BOR. Or if they are simply Mobys.

besser tot als rot on January 4, 2011 at 10:13 PM

Nah, pundit does it to get his jollies off. He loves pissing conservatives off. It make his day.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:16 PM

Hey, any of you guys got any 100 watt incandescent light bulbs for sale? They have been outlawed here in CALIFORNIA.

I need some lighting for my underground bunker. My tunneling efforts will pay handsome dividends when you people soon find out that life above ground becomes intolerable.

Geochelone on January 4, 2011 at 10:18 PM

The lesson that America is going to end up learning is, you can’t compete with people who are willing to just work, eat, sleep, and study, doing little else. We know that because we used to be that…long long ago, when we were immigrants fresh off the boat.

RBMN on January 4, 2011 at 10:19 PM

Ok we’ll vote all of them out in 2012, then if that don’t work, we’ll arm ourselves and take the government back.

BruceB on January 4, 2011 at 10:19 PM

Hey, any of you guys got any 100 watt incandescent light bulbs for sale? They have been outlawed here in CALIFORNIA.

I need some lighting for my underground bunker. My tunneling efforts will pay handsome dividends when you people soon find out that life above ground becomes intolerable.

Geochelone on January 4, 2011 at 10:18 PM

Another reason liberty-minded people should consider moving to Texas and starting a new nation. The libs would love it.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:20 PM

A two-man chain saw.

RBMN on January 4, 2011 at 10:07 PM

You made me look up what a two-man chainsaw is. Cool.

miConsevative on January 4, 2011 at 10:20 PM

Why is this an A or B situation? We CAN cut spending to avoid defaulting. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

SouthernGent on January 4, 2011 at 10:21 PM

The debt ceiling can be raised a small amount, like 100 billion or so, so it’s a thing that can be pushed back incrementally. They don’t have to raise it by trillions of dollars.

Secondly, and more importantly, they can tie any small incremental increase in the debt to the repeal of Obamacare.

It’s a perfect situation for the Republicans: raise the debt by a tiny amount, so that the government doesn’t default, and also repeal Obamacare.

Sydney Carton on January 4, 2011 at 10:21 PM

Another reason liberty-minded people should consider moving to Texas and starting a new nation. The libs would love it.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:20 PM

Works for me. They can have D.C. We’ll take the Constitution.

miConsevative on January 4, 2011 at 10:21 PM

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

The only way the Chinese would dump US Treasuries and the dollar would be if they were working with Obama to destroy the US. It would hurt the Chinese too much to purposely devalue their own dollar holdings that way.

Same way with a bank. They don’t want to throw away the possibility of getting paid off some time in the future, just because you can’t pay right now.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Why is Jack Wheeler being Murdered not a Big Deal ??

wheels on January 4, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Geochelone on January 4, 2011 at 10:18 PM

We should start trading tips on our bunkers, how-to’s, decorating ideas and such.

Careful though, you start talking bunkers and AP keeps a close watch on you; it’s awfully close to the verboten topic of Red Dawn fantasies.

Bishop on January 4, 2011 at 10:23 PM

The lesson that America is going to end up learning is, you can’t compete with people who are willing to just work, eat, sleep, and study, doing little else. We know that because we used to be that…long long ago, when we were immigrants fresh off the boat.

RBMN on January 4, 2011 at 10:19 PM

When that discipline is coupled with strong education, we have a challenge on our hands as we subsidize people that eat, sleep….doing little else.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:23 PM

Why is this an A or B situation? We CAN cut spending to avoid defaulting. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

Precisely. Default is a red herring.

Bugler on January 4, 2011 at 10:24 PM

The only way the Chinese would dump US Treasuries and the dollar would be if they were working with Obama to destroy the US. It would hurt the Chinese too much to purposely devalue their own dollar holdings that way.

Same way with a bank. They don’t want to throw away the possibility of getting paid off some time in the future, just because you can’t pay right now.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Ever screw a gangster over a loan?

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:24 PM

Why is Jack Wheeler being Murdered not a Big Deal ??

wheels on January 4, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Must be the R.

artist on January 4, 2011 at 10:24 PM

Why is this an A or B situation? We CAN cut spending to avoid defaulting. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

Precisely. Default is a red herring.

Bugler on January 4, 2011 at 10:24 PM

I don’t have the pie chart in front of me right now as i’m watching football, but to pay the debt while remaining under the debt ceiling would require immediate huge cuts ….to what?

Social Security?

Medicare?

Military?

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Ever screw a gangster over a loan?

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:24 PM

I don’t patronize loan sharks. If the Chinese ARE loan sharks, it’s gonna get really bad.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Why is Hot Air still allowing you to post here?

katy on January 4, 2011 at 10:10 PM

I can see the comparison.

/

SnarkVader on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

If the debt ceiling isn’t raised then what.
1. Every single federally issued check bounces the next day?
2. No one in this country of 310 million goes to work anymore?
3. Every privately held bank account is vaporized the next day?
4. Does the government not immediately set priorities for absolutely necessary payments?
5. Perhaps the unseen benefit is businesses rethink the U.S. economy now that they know we are serious about spending. Why is this positive aspect ignored?
6. After a serious government disruption, just how many debt obligation will ultimately go completely “unpaid”, bringing about this so-called collapse.

I’m not buying any of it. Pointy heads think they are so wise to all things macro-economic when the simplicity of common sense cannot be broken. You can’t keep spending more than you take in or this will never stop. I put forward that after the initial disruption, the benefits from knowing we are serious about saving the country from collapse under the burden of unrestrained debt, far outweighs the temporary costs of an (admittedly serious) disruption in federal spending. No way I’m buying this story that not raising the debt ceiling is “the end of days”, quite the contrary.

Norbitz on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Yes
Yes
Yes
Whatever it takes

I’ve said this many times, but why do we have military bases in Germany, Italy, Japan, etc. Close ‘em down. Additionally, how much money do we flush away with the United Nations? What a crock.

SouthernGent on January 4, 2011 at 10:29 PM

We should start trading tips on our bunkers, how-to’s, decorating ideas and such.

Careful though, you start talking bunkers and AP keeps a close watch on you; it’s awfully close to the verboten topic of Red Dawn fantasies.

Bishop on January 4, 2011 at 10:23 PM

That problem is easily remedied my friend. We shall talk in code. I have developed a subterranean dialect that not even Morlock spies can understand. AP will be none the wiser. It will sound like jabberwocky to his untrained ear.

Geochelone on January 4, 2011 at 10:30 PM

I don’t have the pie chart in front of me right now as i’m watching football, but to pay the debt while remaining under the debt ceiling would require immediate huge cuts ….to what?

Social Security?

Medicare?

Military?

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Wow, that’s exactly what they are saying on every state run news outlet right now. Way to follow the line.

Keemo on January 4, 2011 at 10:31 PM

SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT. PULL OUT OUR TROOPS. STOP SENDING SOCIAL SECURITY CHECKS, FUNDING MEDICARE, ETC. I DONT CARE SEND THEM ALL HOME NO MORE GOVERNMENT DO NOT VOTE FOR THE DEBT CEILING HIKE AND WATCH MORE GLENN BECK

And you wonder why people are reluctant to let you putzes anywhere near the levers of government.

Grow Fins on January 4, 2011 at 10:31 PM

We thought my sister would wake up when she lost her husband – then her house – then her job – now she’s whittling away at her 401k. These guys are spending our 401k’s – and our kids.

miConsevative on January 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM

Sorry to hear about your sister. I’m not advocating raising the debt ceiling without a real intervention.

But you are right, unless the spending addiction isn’t stopped, then we will lose everything.

I’m willing to have faith in the new Republican outsiders will stick to principals.

Kini on January 4, 2011 at 10:31 PM

Lol, wtf are they calling actual cuts??? Are they going to say raising the budget of the EPA 5% instead of 10% a cut??? At what point are the fngs going to say NO! You will not receive and increase this year and we have cut your department by 10% based on last years budget. If they complain increase the cut to 20%!

Africanus on January 4, 2011 at 10:32 PM

I don’t patronize loan sharks. If the Chinese ARE loan sharks, it’s gonna get really bad.

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

They have murdered more people than Hitler and Stalin combined.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:33 PM

I’ve said this many times, but why do we have military bases in Germany, Italy, Japan, etc. Close ‘em down. Additionally, how much money do we flush away with the United Nations? What a crock.

SouthernGent on January 4, 2011 at 10:29 PM

Exactly… I’ll know we have serious politicians when I see them defunding the UN organized crime ring.

Keemo on January 4, 2011 at 10:33 PM

we’ll arm ourselves and take the government back.

priceless. Ok bubba. You take the Army, Tex over there will handle the Marines.

Grow Fins on January 4, 2011 at 10:34 PM

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

No. There will be no need to touch entitlements initially. I would favor immediate, across-the-board cuts to all discretionary spending as an initial step. Then there will be time to begin the process of eliminating programs wholesale.

And yes, this will be politically difficult for our elected overlords. Tough. That is their friggin’ job.

Bugler on January 4, 2011 at 10:34 PM

They have murdered more people than Hitler and Stalin combined.

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:33 PM

ain’t skeered..I’m old, near blind, helpless. I’ll take out as many as I can before they over run my position….

WOLVERINES!

Skandia Recluse on January 4, 2011 at 10:35 PM

I don’t have the pie chart in front of me right now as i’m watching football, but to pay the debt while remaining under the debt ceiling would require immediate huge cuts ….to what?

Social Security?

Medicare?

Military?

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Wow, that’s exactly what they are saying on every state run news outlet right now. Way to follow the line.

Keemo on January 4, 2011 at 10:31 PM

You must have keemo brain. [I'm sorry if you are a cancer survivor].

Seriously, what huge immediate cuts will you make?

toliver on January 4, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Grow Fins on January 4, 2011 at 10:31 PM

Oh the irony you ignorant monkey
NOSTOPPINGUS CAPITALS BOLDED ITALICS IS A LIBERAL FOOL LIKE YOURSELF WITH POOR PRESCRIPTIONS.

Inanemergencydial on January 4, 2011 at 10:36 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5